"... to the path." (The clarifying details are about the only thing that most people would like to see added.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghalfaire

This assumes the clubs are fitted for you and that the groves on the club face are parallel to the ground at impact with the ball. If the groves are not parallel to the ground this too can create a side spin component to the ball;s rotational velocity vector, even if the club face is square to the linear velocity vector.

There's no Rule of Golf that says the grooves must be parallel to the sole (only to each other), so if slices could be counter-acted by angling the grooves, manufacturers would have been doing that for decades. Grooves don't matter in this regard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghalfaire

In addition unfitted clubs can cause the sole of the club to not impact the ground evenly (e.g. the toe or heel of the club might strike the ground first twisting the club into a closed or open position at impact. Clubs that are to upright for you causes to toe of the club to impact the ground first causing the slice I believe).

We impact the ball before we impact the ground, so any twisting that might occur after the ball's gone is irrelevant. A club that's too upright will lead to shots to the left for the same reason that if you swing a club level with your shoulders, the face points varying amounts left (depending on the club's loft). Vice versa for a club that's too flat.

There's no Rule of Golf that says the grooves must be parallel to the sole (only to each other), so if slices could be counter-acted by angling the grooves, manufacturers would have been doing that for decades. Grooves don't matter in this regard. (from Iacas)

I understand and agree with everything you said except maybe this. I have thought that it is the grooves that give the ball its' spin which ideally would be all back spin with not side spin component. Since it is the ball crawling up the club across the grooves that imparts spin I would have to believe that the angle of the grooves would make a difference. But for sure it is a secondary effect compared to an open club face and maybe not significant at all in the scheme of thing. Just trying to understand the physics of how the spin (rotational velocity vector) is imparted to the ball. Now that I think about it I would believe, as you said, if the manufactures could solve a slice by adjusting the groove angles they would have done so by now and the USGA would probably have outlawed it a few years later. So if such an effect exist at all it can't be significant.

We just had this conversation elsewhere, and it turned into a whole big thing, so I'm going to say this very plainly and very clearly: the clubface is not glued to the path.

A 10 degree adjustment in path often results in a 0, 1, or 2 degree adjustment in face. A golfer with a square (to target) clubface and a path -10 degrees (left) can swing 3 degrees to the right and have a clubface angle that's only 2 degrees open. We see it day in and day out. We fix the path in four swings...

"He does so and hits a push slice" is a fabrication. We fix the path - and make huge strides to where we can work on some other piece the next time - all the time. The path does not force the face to move a similar amount if done properly.

That's why your first solution is bogus. First you get the guy matching his face to his path - okay, so his clubface is 10 degrees left at impact, has no loft, etc. Then you adjust his path... and his clubface is still 8 degrees left at impact. So then you have to fix the clubface angle again.

Three steps versus one. I'll take the one step every time.

Does that mean we never fix the face? No. But fixing the path - the actual cause of the large, vast majority of slices - is so much easier and quicker.

P.S. If the face angle and path were magically glued, why in your first example doesn't the path move farther left when the clubface angle moves left? Why aren't they glued together there?

P.P.S. The average amateur's grip is too strong as it is. That's why their clubface angle is too closed at impact. They come across the ball so much they've learned to at least start the ball to the left so their slice has a chance of curving back and staying inside the fairway.

Well, your Mr. Average Golfer seems to have more problems than mine. Mine was able to make the same swing after changing his clubface angle, yours needed extra swings.

Regardless, all I was trying to point out is that there might just be more than one way to get a golfer to improve. And, after all, it's the improvement that counts.

The wrists should load and unload naturally. Any manipulation with the smaller muscles (ie wrists or hands) is likely to be less consistent due to more critical timing. The body and the core (large muscles) can be employed to load/unload the right arm flying wedge.

This is what most people think and too many pros teach. If you take any stick or rod and try to maximize the 'clubhead' speed you need to make the head snap. And it is impossible to create that snap without delaying release of the wrist angle. In order to delay the release you need to work against the force trying to straighten your wrists, i.e. centrifugal/centripetal force. This work is done with muscles not only in your lower hand but also in your upper hand. Incapability of doing this is one of the reasons why there is such a vast difference in distance between a good and an average golfer.

What you must NOT do is try to create the 'snap' with your wrists. This will lead to very critical timing, which I believe you pointed out yourself. The key is to actively resist the release with different muscles (than wrists) and to let the wrist angle to be released as late as possible. This is very difficult to learn but that is what all the best golfers do, just check some driving videos of top pros.

P.S. Not even loading the wrists is natural but something golfers learn to do actively. A person trying to hit a golfball for the first time in his life would never have a flat upper hand wrist and cocked lower hand wrist. Never.

All this ball flight law stuff is getting quite old and tiring... back to the topic of Martin Hall, he was a European tour player and is rated as one of America's top instructors. I appreciate the fact that he is trying to simplify things- putting things in easily understood terms that one can transfer on to the course when actually playing a round, and issues are arising. If one is stuck thinking about so many mechanical factors during the swing, the body will become confused- you see it on the range/course everyday, people running through the list of thousands of swing thoughts before they take the club back. Having one simple thought, maybe two, is about the most one can think of in the middle of a swing. IMO he's trying to get one to play the game, shoot at the flag, and have fun- not be a golf robot with too much data clouding one's mind.

I appreciate the fact that he is trying to simplify things- putting things in easily understood terms that one can transfer on to the course when actually playing a round, and issues are arising. If one is stuck thinking about so many mechanical factors during the swing, the body will become confused- you see it on the range/course everyday, people running through the list of thousands of swing thoughts before they take the club back. Having one simple thought, maybe two, is about the most one can think of in the middle of a swing. IMO he's trying to get one to play the game, shoot at the flag, and have fun- not be a golf robot with too much data clouding one's mind.

Nobody here is saying any differently, except that what almost everyone else is saying is this: "if you're going to give a tip, make sure it can't be confused for almost exactly the opposite of what you intend to say."

I'm all for having one thought and keeping things simple. But there's a big difference between "my clubface is open to the target" and "I'm swinging way to the left of my target." Very different problems and fixes.

Also, you don't use all your swing thoughts when playing. You use a lot of them when working on making a change or getting rid of something. Being accurate and knowing what to do when making a change is very important, you can't just go out there, aim at the flag and swing.

I've got a lot of swing thoughts and techniques I can utilize when working on something specific, different thoughts for different fix. That does not mean I walk around thinking about all of this on the course. It is limited to one or two when playing.

To segway this post into the topic; how could I expect to improve if I tried to fix my over-the-top move by closing the clubface?

Nobody here is saying any differently, except that what almost everyone else is saying is this: "if you're going to give a tip, make sure it can't be confused for almost exactly the opposite of what you intend to say."

I really admire your perseverance Erik. However, it's still a shame so many threads end up with you having to repeat yourself ad nauseam.

Does this guy have a prop for every shot? I think I saw him bring a stuffed gator head to show how to hit a punch shot. I'm not quite sure why, but he sounded like a moron. Then he had a table sitting in front of him and was trying to tell the viewer how flipping the club was good. Does this guy even play golf or does he just bring these silly props in the studio to try and make himself sound like he knows what he's doing. Either way, its not working.

All this ball flight law stuff is getting quite old and tiring... back to the topic of Martin Hall, he was a European tour player and is rated as one of America's top instructors. I appreciate the fact that he is trying to simplify things- putting things in easily understood terms that one can transfer on to the course when actually playing a round, and issues are arising. If one is stuck thinking about so many mechanical factors during the swing, the body will become confused- you see it on the range/course everyday, people running through the list of thousands of swing thoughts before they take the club back. Having one simple thought, maybe two, is about the most one can think of in the middle of a swing. IMO he's trying to get one to play the game, shoot at the flag, and have fun- not be a golf robot with too much data clouding one's mind.

You can simplify things I am all for it but it dosnt matter if your a tour player or not due to most of those are cluless anyhow in regard to learning and swings.

My favorite with Hall is when he teaches swingplane and Holly hit it so much left after the drill and clearly it dont work to make a good golf swing.

You dont need to think and have swing thougts when swinging, even when your learning and re-tooling to a new swing.

If you simplify the learning and dont understand how the brain and perception works and then also teach swings that is complicated and timing dependent it wont help with simplifying...

Does this guy have a prop for every shot? I think I saw him bring a stuffed gator head to show how to hit a punch shot. I'm not quite sure why, but he sounded like a moron. Then he had a table sitting in front of him and was trying to tell the viewer how flipping the club was good. Does this guy even play golf or does he just bring these silly props in the studio to try and make himself sound like he knows what he's doing. Either way, its not working.

Martin knows how to play golf, and teach golf pretty well... if he was talking about flipping it was likely a segment on pitching. Let's not go off the rails here. Specific critiques are welcome, "he sounded like a moron" because he taught a punch shot drill don't add up though.

It was advice like his in regards to just mentioning club face that made my nasty slice even worse and turn into some really weird and bad shots. I watch just about all of his shows and most of the tips and drills are great but this one piece can definitely be damaging. When I kept hearing my clubface was open in causing the slice I worked hard to close it through multiple ways and ended up getting even worse. Once I learned here that it is related to swing path and since my ball started straight then sliced it was a swing path issue, I had it fixed in a couple of weeks. It's about both parts working together, to mention just the face angle is just as bad as mentioning the swing path only. It's how the two work together.

It was advice like his in regards to just mentioning club face that made my nasty slice even worse and turn into some really weird and bad shots. I watch just about all of his shows and most of the tips and drills are great but this one piece can definitely be damaging. When I kept hearing my clubface was open in causing the slice I worked hard to close it through multiple ways and ended up getting even worse. Once I learned here that it is related to swing path and since my ball started straight then sliced it was a swing path issue, I had it fixed in a couple of weeks. It's about both parts working together, to mention just the face angle is just as bad as mentioning the swing path only. It's how the two work together.

I think that is a point that a lot of people miss, it's all about the differential between the two. Once you grok that, it becomes much easier to make changes, still really friggen hard but easier

I have to say that the SandTrap has been grokking the ball flight laws for a while now. Yes, I had to look it up.

Grok means to understand so thoroughly that the observer becomes a part of the observed—to merge, blend, intermarry, lose identity in group experience. It means almost everything that we mean by religion, philosophy, and science—and it means as little to us (because of our Earthling assumptions) as color means to a blind man.

I have to say that the SandTrap has been grokking the ball flight laws for a while now. Yes, I had to look it up.

Grok means to understand so thoroughly that the observer becomes a part of the observed—to merge, blend, intermarry, lose identity in group experience. It means almost everything that we mean by religion, philosophy, and science—and it means as little to us (because of our Earthling assumptions) as color means to a blind man.